Richmond, Virginia, has restored an old canal. Beside the canal, they have
constructed a walkway. Adjacent to the walkway is a floodwall which they have
decorated with murals depicting Richmond's historic events and figures. The
murals were hung on June 2, 1999.

One of the murals was of Robert E. Lee.

Black activist City Councilman Sa'ad El-Amin met with the "Richmond Historic
Riverfront Foundation" and threatened a boycott if the Lee portrait remained. On
June 3, 1999 they took the Lee mural down.

A few comments...

The so-called Richmond Historic
Riverfront Foundation should be called the Richmond Pseudo-historic
Riverfront Foundation. or better, the Richmond Politically-correct
Riverfront Foundation, or better yet, the Richmond Weak-kneed Riverfront
Foundation. One threat of a boycott and they fold!

We'll not go into a defense of Lee here. He needs no defense. It's apparent
that the protesters haven't studied Lee. They are ignorant of him and his life.
They are trying to change history and that is sad. History cannot be changed,
erased, or ignored.

The local TV station (WWBT , channel 12) conducted a survey on June 3,
1999. 88% of the respondents to the survey said that the Lee Mural should be
restored, including 38% of the black respondents.

How this will end, we don't know.
Maybe the Weak-kneed Foundation will fold again, maybe not. But unless
they fold, we will never see the Richmond Canal Walk unless we can't avoid
it while visiting the new National Park Visitor's Center which is scheduled
to relocate near the river this fall.

June 5, 1999 UPDATE

The Richmond Historic Riverfront Foundation has announced that it will put
together a committee of citizens who will assess the images used on the
floodwall.

This is the typical response of
a bureaucracy when cornered. Form a committee and, by the time they come
up with something, the controversy will have dissipated.

If this committee's results have to be approved by councilman Sa'ad El-Amin,
then what good is it anyway?

And what can they decide? If they decide to leave the Lee Mural down then
they are endorsing an unacceptable status quo.

Former Black Governor L. Douglas Wilder said (quoted from the Richmond
Times-Dispatch ) "The big problem here is a failure to communicate...The
majority of Richmonders are not interested in obilterating history...There is
a place for Robert E. Lee on the wall."

Supporters of the Lee portrait draped the Confederate Battle Flag over a
bridge crossing the canal just as dignitaries began a boat tour. When Former
Governor L. Douglas Wilder saw the flag, he stood up and saluted it.

Over 900 people contacted the Richmond Times-Dispatch Friday, June 4, 1999.
According to the Dispatch all but a handful were adamant against the removal
of the mural.

July 1, 1999 UPDATE

The committee has decided to put Lee on the Wall! However, it will not be the
photo at the top of this page. Instead it will be this one:

64

This photo was selected because it was taken in Richmond after the war. But it is
not over with yet. The committee is going to exhibit the murals, including Lee,
from July 5 thru 11 and ask for public (residents) comments and says it may make
adjustments if necessary.

July 18, 1999 UPDATE

After the review period, the Committee reaffirmed its decision to place Lee's
likeness on the wall. City Councilman Sa'ad El-Amin immediately moved that the
City Council block putting any murals on the wall. This, in direct contradiction
to elected black leaders who said that Lee should be on the wall. According to
formalities, the resolution must be addressed at the next council meeting.
Accordingly, no murals will be hung until after the city council acts. Some wag
suggested that they tear down the flood wall. Then, the next flood will resolve
all of the canal walk's problems.

It is interesting to note that, at the same time, a big deal was being made of
an exhibit of the Pharaohs being shown in Richmond. Weren't the Children of
Israel held in slavery by the Pharaohs? We heard no outcry about that.

July 21, 1999 UPDATE

VIRGINIA BEACH PROVES THE WHOLE STATE IS NOT DUMB!

On July 19, 1999 Virginia Beach honored 24 Virginia Legends, when they opened
their "Virginia Legends Walk". The 24 Legends were determined by 570 judges from
101 nominees selected by the public. The judges consisted of history professors,
museum directors, news organizations, and others. Each of the judges voted, and
the top 24 nominees, ranked by the number of votes received, were selected.

According to the Richmond Times Dispatch (July 20, 1999) Thomas Jefferson was
first, beating out George Washington by three votes. Third was...you guessed
it...Robert E. Lee, followed by Patrick Henry, Edgar Allen Poe, etc. Stonewall
Jackson was 14th! Among the blacks selected were Arthur Ashe and Bill
"Bojangles" Robinson. Mr. Ashe's sister, Loretta Harris, represented her family
at the dedication, and Richard Bland Lee, the general's cousin, twice removed,
represented the Lees. All of the "Legends" were shown the respect they deserved.

Quite a contrast to Richmond.

Guess we'll visit Virginia Beach before we visit the Richmond Canal.

July 27, 1999 UPDATE

After several hours of comments by the public and the ranting and raving of
Councilman Sa'ad El-Amin, the Richmond City Council voted 8 to 1 against
El-Amin's resolution to have no murals on the floodwall, and 6 to 3 in favor of
the resolution placing the murals, including Lee, on the floodwall. Although
the defense of Lee on the council was lukewarm at best, it did show that there
are people on the council who can look objectively and fairly at Richmond's
history and who will not agree with the distortion of history.

Of course, El-Amin is not finished. We are of the opinion that he will milk this for all of the publicity that
he can get. So the next step will probably be a lawsuit. In the end, however,
he will lose, as well he should. It would be interesting to find out what
he gained from starting this controversy.

August 5, 1999 UPDATE

The beat goes on! Now the black associations are shunning the two black
council members who had the intelligence to understand history and the need
for racial compromise by voting for the Lee Mural to be restored to the wall.
Since over 50% of the blacks in a recent Richmond Times Dispatch's poll and
an overwhelming majority of people who viewed the Murals during the committee's
deliberations, favored the Murals, maybe these biased associations will get a
wake up call at the next election.

While we can write off these events as just another of the silly things that
the Richmond City Council has become famous for over the past several years,
it is embarrassing to learn that they have gained national notoriety. In the
August 4, 1999 Richmond Times Dispatch Letters to the Editor we find this:

EDITOR, TIMES-DISPATCH:
One of your City Council meetings made the local television news here in Los
Angeles. How embarrassing for one of the most historically notable cities in
America that the mechanisms of your city government come across to the rest
of the nation as no less than minstrel-show buffoonery. And all of this
involving the inclusion of Robert E. Lee, a man Winston Churchill called "one
of the noblest Americans who ever lived" on some flood wall.

I assume the self-appointed lead scat-dancer of your City Council is Sa'ad
El-Amin, whose shuck-and-jive politics are those of divisiveness.

Which reminds me of another Churchill quote: "A nation that forgets its past
has no future."

Embarrassing, indeed.

August 28, 1999 UPDATE

There is little news to report while new murals, including Robert E. Lee's, are
being made. According to the Richmond Times Dispatch some comments made by
Councilman El-Amin are being played on one of the late night network programs.
He has expressed a desire to be on that program in order to explain his
position. No surprise there.

We recently received an e-mail from [a northern city resident], who does not
wish to be identified, making what we think are very thoughtful statements
regarding this episode. His remarks, with some editing, can be read via this
Link.

September 5, 1999 UPDATE

As we await the hanging of the Lee Mural, Richmond City Councilman Sa'ad El-Amin
has something else demanding his attention:

According to the Richmond Times-Dispatch in its September 4, 1999 edition:

"The four-year suspension of the license of Richmond City Councilman Sa'ad
El-Amin to practice law will take effect Oct. 1...

"The allegations of misconduct against El-Amin centered on two cases in which
he accepted payments from women who wanted him to represent them in pursuing
racial discrimination claims and a third case he which he took a car from a
state prison inmate as payment for future legal work.

"El-Amin acknowledged that he was negligent in his representation of the two
women and that he did not handle fees they advanced as legal ethics require.
But he insisted he was not dishonest in those cases and eventually earned the
fee represented by the car from the inmate.

"In a unanimous opinion, the state Supreme Court disagreed..."

October 26, 1999 UPDATE

Still awaiting the the hanging of the Lee Mural.

November 3, 1999 UPDATE

Well, they started hanging the "revised" murals this week. It will take two to
three weeks to complete and the Lee Mural will be among the last to go up.

One of the black leaders interviewed by the Richmond Newspaper said that they
weren't finished with this and that he had not been aware that the Murals were
being hung.

More to come...evidently.

November 21, 1999 UPDATE

They have hung the Lee Mural on the floodwall. We visited the site (It is near
14th street) and we must say we wonder what all of the fuss was about. The whole
display of murals is disappointing. The floodwall was not placed with the idea
of displaying anything on it. The view of it is blocked in numerous places
unless you're right in front of it. From a distance, that part of it that is
visible looks like it has a bunch of billboards on it.

We took some photos and will display them later, but, at this time, it looks like
the controversy is over.

December 4, 1999 UPDATE

The Controversy was about this????

We'd be against the Lee Mural on this bizarre wall, because it does a
disservice to the man!

Fini.

January 18, 2000 UPDATE

We're baaaaaaack...

According to the Richmond Times-Dispatch, sometime between 2 a.m. and 5 p.m.
yesterday someone burned the mural of Robert E. Lee on the floodwall.
Councilman Sa'ad El-Amin said that public officials could not and should not
condone acts of vandalism of public property. The Times-Dispatch reports that
Police may have a suspect.

What can we say? This is a result of the level of education in history that
recent generations have been given. The hot heads, who have had no history
education to speak of, are reacting to the rantings of leaders who also have
never studied Lee.

And what do these hot heads accomplish?
Nothing less than increasing the division between the races. But maybe
that's what they want.

By the way, in today's article, the Times-Dispatch repeated a statement it
made during the controversy last year: "A different portrait of Lee, not in
uniform, was ... put up in November." Now we ask you. Look at the top photograph
on this page of Lee in 1863 in uniform and compare it with the 1865 photograph
that was placed on the wall. Can you really say that Lee is not in uniform in
the 1865 photograph?

January 23, 2000 UPDATE

Yesterday, in an editoral, the Richmond Times Dispatch said that if the Lee
Mural was not restored, then all of the Murals should be taken down.

February 14, 2000 UPDATE

Well, the Lee Mural has been restored to the floodwall. The Richmond police have
indicated that there will be increased surveillance to insure that another attack
does not take place.

As if the Lee Mural was not enough, the Richmond Mayor and Sa'ad El-Amin --- who
else? --- have proposed re-naming the Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee bridges
after some black notables. The SCV is threatening a boycott of Richmond. I shall
not pursue this latest in a growing list of embarrassments brought to us by the
clowns at City Hall unless it rises above the current bottom-dwelling position
taken by the City's "leaders".

Except for the items provided with permission to the author of this Site, this
complete Site is Copyright ; 2000 - 2017. All Rights are
Reserved. No portion of this site, including this
index page and any of the separate pages, may be copied, retransmitted,
reposted, duplicated or otherwise used without the express written permission of
USA Civil War.com.